Jack
Rueben Shaw was released on probation after serving time in
prison for attempted first-degree sexual abuse of a minor.
Shaw's probation was later revoked for failing to
successfully complete sex offender treatment, failing to
comply with no-contact orders related to his victim and his
other children, and engaging in unsupervised contact with
female minors in violation of his probation conditions. On
appeal, Shaw argues that there was insufficient evidence of
these probation violations. For the reasons explained here,
we affirm the revocation of Shaw's probation.

Factual
Background

In
2006, Shaw pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of attempted
first-degree sexual abuse of a minor.1 His probation conditions
required that he complete sex offender treatment, and that he
abide by any special instructions issued by his probation
officer. A few years later in 2010, pro tern Superior Court
Judge David C. Stewart found Shaw in violation of the
probation condition requiring him to complete sex offender
treatment.

Judge
Stewart modified the probation condition that previously
prohibited Shaw from contacting his victim (one of his
daughters) until she turned eighteen. The modified condition
prohibited all future contact with the daughter unless she
submitted written consent to the probation department. Having
been further informed that Shaw's now-adult children also
did not wish to have contact with Shaw, the judge also...